I. Moncrieff-Scottish-Canadian Voice Champions Conditionalism

Born in Scotland, but later residing in Canada, WILLIAM GLEN MONCRIEFF (1816-1893), gifted Scottish Presbyterian minister, was the son of the professor of Hebrew in the Andersonian University of Glasgow. After a thorough training for the ministry, he was graduated from the University of Glasgow, where lie specialized in Greek and Latin. He was a forceful writer and persuasive speaker, with high scholastic attainments. In fact, lie was known as an orator of brilliance, and was a contributor to various journals. Moncrieff formed a bridge, as it were, between Britain and America.CFF2 469.2

His first pastoral appointment was in Musselburgh, followed by Edinburgh (1852-1854). Meantime H. H. Dobney’s book, The Scripture Doctrine of Future Punishment, had convinced him of Immortality Only in Christ. As a result he published, in 1848, a forty-eight-page pamphlet, Dialogues on Future Punishment. Its appearance caused an unexpected commotion, not only locally but throughout Scotland. His pastoral relationships became highly strained, for his associates in the ministry sided against him, some going so far as to say that he had “gone mad,” or had become an “infidel.”CFF2 469.3

1. PIONEER OF CONDITIONALISM IN SCOTLAND

In 1849 a series of articles by the Reverend John Kirk appeared in The Christian News, attacking the Dialogues. These articles were circulated in pamphlet form. Moncrieff sought to reply in the same journal, but the editor refused. At that time the doctrine of Conditionalism was as yet advocated by only a few stray voices in Scotland. Thus Moncrieff was a Conditionalist pioneer in his native land. But in spite of the opposition, a succession of treatises continued to issue from his pen, one being,Soul: or, the Hebrew word Nephesh, and the Greek word Psuche, in 1852. And in 1853 he even started a Conditionalist monthly called The Expositor of Life and Immortality. Erelong his works came to be well known on both sides of the Atlantic.CFF2 470.1

Picture 1: Charles Frederick Hudson, William Glen Moncrieff
Left: prof. Charles Frederick Hudson (d. 1867), scholarly conditionalist author—produces American Conditionalist classics. Right: William Glen Moncrieff (d. 1893), of Scotland and Canada—wicked will return to nonexistence.
Page 470CFF2 470

2. TRANSFERS TO CANADA; ISSUES ABLE BOOK

But because of the intense opposition to his belief in the ultimate destruction of the wicked, prejudice continued to run so high and conditions became so unpleasant that he decided to resign his charge.CFF2 471.1

So he terminated his services at the Victoria Place Chapel and emigrated to Ontario, Canada, in 1854. There he opened a private finishing school in London, Ontario, and gave himself to literary pursuits.CFF2 471.2

Tall and dignified in appearance, he was recognized as a speaker of persuasive power, an effective writer with a sober, solid, and fruitful mind, and a master of logical argument. In 1861, at the outbreak of the American Civil War, he became editor of the London [Ontario] Daily Times. He was also a historian, and was considered one of Canada’s ablest orators. Because of this, lie was chosen to give the address at the Lincoln Memorial Ser v ices, in 1865, in the large Methodist church of London. His later works include Man’s Only Hope of Immortality, and Future Probation—Is That Awaiting Any of the Unrighteous? (1891).CFF2 471.3

3.WICKED RETURN TO NONEXISTENCE

Most of Moncrieff’s contributions were in periodical article or tractate form. ^{11) Such as fox The Faith Library, Nos 18 and 42.} One example, from the latter category, must suffice-a tract first published in Bristol in 1852 (and reprinted in Boston) titled The Question of Questions It was based on Luke 9:25—“For what is a man advantaged, if he gain the whole world and lose his own soul, or be cast away?” After dealing with “THE GAIN” Side, ^{22) W.G. Moncrieff, The Question of Questions, p. 1.} Moncrieff turns to “THE Loss” aspect. This he defines as the loss of “himself, his very being in the universe,” so as to become “as if he had never been.” This he amplifies as “returning to non-existence, whence he originally came.” To lose one’s soul, then, “most emphatically conveys the idea that the unholy shall ultimately cease to exist.” ^{33) Ibid., p. 4.}CFF2 471.4

4. DEPARTS FROM CONSCIOUS EXISTENCE

Moncrieff expands this thought in these clarifying words:
“The idea of a man and a soul are substantially one. To make a man, you must produce a soul; for there cannot be a man without a soul: and to make a human soul is to make a human being, capable of all responsible functions as a moral agent, and susceptible also of suffering and pleasure. For a man then to lose his own soul, is, in other words, a soul losing itself; or, as it is in the text, a man losing himself; his being departing from conscious existence. A man might lose happiness, and yet keep his soul; a man might lose heaven, and the mercy and favor of God, and yet retain his soul: but he cannot lose his soul and yet continue a soul; for that would be losing a soul and keeping a soul at the same moment! Losing consciousness, an essential attribute of a living soul or a living self, and yet preserving it! Losing self, and yet preserving self; which is utterly impossible.” ^{44) Ibid., p. 5.}CFF2 472.1

Stating that the Greek word for “soul” is elsewhere in the New Testament translated “life,” he adds:
“So rendered, it conveys the idea which is given in the text. The man is to lose his life; and when a man loses his life, is he not as if he had never been? Can he lose his life, and yet in any sense be alive? Can he be conscious of having lost that which is essential to consciousness itself? To lose the life, then, is to cease to be, not here simply, but anywhere in space; and losing life, losing his soul, and losing himself, are only different modes of expressing the same awfully solemn thought, that the doom of the godless is that they shall be finally swept from conscious existence, as unfit for being.” ^{55) Ibid., pp. 5,6.}CFF2 472.2

5. ENDLESS TORMENT MAKES “MOCKERY OF TRUTH.”

Addressing himself to the contention of “prevailing theology,” that in death the wicked are eternally alive in “ceaseless torments in hell”—with agony waxing “more and more intense,” “tossing there on the boiling flood,” with “every moment producing a more intense consciousness” ^{66) Ibid., p. 6.} —Moncrieff says:
“Lost his life, and yet living in agony! Lost his soul, and he, the man, the soul, tormented! O mockery of truth! O insult to language! O daring perversion of his threatenings who is ordained to be the judge of quick and dead! Popular theology affirms the wicked man shall not lose himself, but shall last perpetually, condemning himself, and enduring the vengeance of sulphurous fires.” ^{77) Ibid.}CFF2 472.3

On the contrary
“God says the unholy shall lose themselves, they shall cease to be capable of pain or pleasure; in a word, they shall die. ‘The wicked shall perish, and the enemies of the Lord shall be as the fat of lambs: they shall consume, into smoke shall they consume away.’ Psalm 37:20. How great the contrastl How mournful to think that millions are believing a lie, and myriads are preaching it from day to day!” ^{88) Ibid.}CFF2 473.1

6. SECOND DEATH IS FINAL DESTRUCTION

Turning then to the expression “Be cast away,” Moncrieff comments, “This is the same idea under a slightly different aspect.” “He loses himself by being cast away.” ^{99) Ibid., pp. 6, 7.}CFF2 473.2

“Since life is to be withdrawn from the impenitent by the divinely appointed agents of destruction: God will burn them up, root and branch.CFF2 473.3

“To our view, the verse perfectly harmonizes with the alarming passage 2 Thessalonians 1:9: ‘Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord;’ that is, a destruction to issue from the Lord, or a destruction of which he is the author.” ^{1010) Ibid., p. 7.}CFF2 473.4

Then he adds:
“Now the self-loss here spoken of is eternal; they are to be punished with an everlasting destruction, not an everlasting preservation in torment, but destruction, and one that is never in the lapse of ages to be repaired. No resurrection follows the second death; the end is destruction; they shall never see life.” ^{1111) Ibid.}CFF2 473.5

7. ALL THE GODLESS REDUCED TO ASHES

Moncrieff climaxes his presentation with this paragraph:
“All the godless shall be reduced to ashes, and no eye shall ever see them more. They shall be blotted from the roll of being, from the page of life. They had their portion in this life, and of this life; they preferred the Now to the After, present enjoyment to immortal being and felicity. Streams may be dried up and again murmur along their ancient channels; trees that have been long reckoned dead may send forth green shoots to wave in the sunshine; the land that has apparently been cursed with sterility may anew bloom like Paradise; stars that cease to shine in the high places of the firmament may afresh be kindled: but no forth-putting of Divine reviving energy shall restore to being the condemned and consumed: the long moonless and morningless night of forgetfulness is their unalterable portion.” ^{1212) Ibid., p. 8.}CFF2 473.6

The significance of Moncrieff’s presentation is increased by its geographical location-Canada.CFF2 474.1